Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12
this country needs right now. >> earlier today, pentagon spokesman, george little, said they had made no plans to its overall defense strategy in the automatic budget cuts approach, the sequester would result in a 9% overall cut the military budget. he spoke with reporters at the pentagon for about 35 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> qaeda man. before getting to your questions, let me address one of the narratives in recent days regarding sequester set to begin friday unless congress acts. there seems to be a belief in some quarters that when it comes to negative impact the sequester will have on our national defense and military readiness, the department of defense is crying wolf. nothing could be further from the truth. he hurt from dod leaders in the past weeks is not hype. it is the blunt truth. it isn't exaggeration. as the clear eyed assessment of what would have been to the department if we were forced to put this mindless mechanism fully into place. under the guidance of secretary cannot come in the department leaders have been candid and forthright in describing how the military
was also inducted into the hall of heroes at the pentagon and honored with a parade. since then meyer has raised more than a million dollars to help send the children of wounded marines to college. and finally, as you have all seen, he is the author of "into the fire: a firsthand account of the most extraordinary battle in the afghan war." leading authorities is very proud to exclusively represent dakota meyer, and now i want to show you a video to hear more about dakota and his story. thank you. ♪ >> it's kind of frustrating because, you know, everyone wants to get an interview about the worst day of your life. >> it was a straightforward mission that then-21-year-old sergeant dakota meyer had been assigned that day. meyer waited anxiously by the vehicles as his team began their parol of the village on foot. as they approached, all hell l broke loose. more than 50 insurgents fired from positions on mountains surrounding the valley and from within the village. back at the vehicles, meyer heard the firing and could see into the valley. the volume of fire increased, and the radio traffic
. just this morning, i was over at the pentagon and i took advantage of the opportunity to sit down with the navy's top ship-building official to discuss what the impact of sequestration would be for our naval fleet. well, one example we've already seen. the navy will keep the u.s.s. abraham lincoln, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, in port rather than repairing and deploying it. across the fleet, the navy is being forced to reduce deployments, maintenance and overhauls for critical repairs. when we look at the ship-building budget, it is evident that sequestration and the continuation of a partial year funding resolution known as the continuing resolution would be absolutely devastating for our navy, for shipbuilding and for our skilled industrial base, and that includes bath ironworks in maine which i'm so proud of which builds the best destroyers in the world. and this has consequences, not only for our work force but also for our national security. it's important to note that secretary panetta has made clear that allowing these sweeping cuts to go into effect would be -- quot
. >> pentagon spokesman george little talked about how sequestration would affect the defense budget. glmpleght first, as you know, the sequestration goes in to effect for the remain of the year. it will require that the department of defense to cut roughly $46 billion from the level of funding provided on the 2013 continuing resolution. all of the last seven months of the fiscal year. by law, sequester would apply to all of the dod budget. including wartime spending. the only exception is that the president has indicated his intend to -- personnel funding from sequestration. dod leaders support the decision, it does not mean that other budget accounts will be cut by larger amounts to offset the exemption. accounted by account item by item. cuts to the operating portion of the dod budget must be equal in percentage at the let of appropriations accounts. for example, army active operation maintenance, navy reserve operation and maintenance, and air force guard. for the investment the dollars cut must be allocated. that means more than 2500 programs or projects that separately identified need to
, first of all, the pentagon didn't show you any video of things that missed. that's bad pr. and the percentage of weapons that were smart weapons in the first gulf war while infinitely more than anything the iraqis had was remarkably small compared to the impression the pentagon gave in their military briefings where they'd only show pictures of smart bombs and smart missiles and things flying through windows. that was a very, very tiny percentage of the munitions actually expended. so i don't think this was so much a revolution in military affairs so much as a vivid demonstration, as you point out, of just how proficient the united states was in waging war especially against a less proficient adversary. but it also was military affairs in a more philosophical, fundamental way, and that is claus wits still has a vote here, and the ultimate goal of the conflict was a political goal and, therefore, the military planning and the air war being a classic case in point of this were designed with a traditional military conclusion which in truth was not revolutionary at all which w
. the abuse and waste and the fraud is astoppedding. i think the pentagon needs to be paired down. we need the pentagon to look at their own priorities." we are pressed for time so i would, if i could, have the joint chiefs go down the line, quickly, if you can answer with yes or no, whether you agree with the general characterization that the senator made. that'd be great. [laughter] >> let me try it. it's a good question. it's a fair question. i don't -- i can't speak for senator hagel, but my interpretation of that is that it is along the lines of something that secretary gates used to say which was that we had accumulated over the decade post-9/11 when our budget was just kept going up over year, and i said this in lo gist ticks. when the budget goes up year in and year out, it's fair to say that when you had a management problem, all of our managers, they -- it was easy to reach for more money to solve your managing problem, whether it's a technical program or problem or something like that. it was noticeable as secretary in logistics that in some places that having had accumulated ov
've seen two budget-related announcements coming out of the pentagon. one, i was looking up just now because i was trying to remember the numbers, and that is that the pentagon is beefing up its cybersecurity force, taking it from 900 to 4,000 and putting a few billion dollars into it. the other one that is apparently being beefed up in these times of budgetary constraints are the special forces. tom, would you just talk about that generally and then, fred, if you would talk about that not just in afghanistan, but in the broader battle and the nature of it, and then we'll come over to publish shah and the non-- membership shah and the nonexistent challenge that faces us in asia. [laughter] >> i'll try to be brief, dani. look, these new capabilities, you know, cyber operations or whatever you want to call them are certainly necessary and needed, and our ability to exploit, you know, the electromagnetic spectrum configured as the internet is, you know, pretty critical. but it's not qualitatively different from other forms of intelligence gathering or, you know, attempts to either by pr
of veterans who are entitled to their health care by causing the pentagon possibly to have to reduce or eliminate tricare funding. that's just unconscionable to me. >> host: on the issue of blame that gregory kind of gets into, washington post poll out today asked about a thousand people about where they would assign blame in this sequester issue. 45% assigning it to congressional republicans, 32% to the president, another 13% assigned it equally between the two. about five more minutes of your calls, and we'll be back to the u.s. senate at 2:15 eastern. in california, rodney's on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. i question the legality of the sequester agreement, because to my understanding sequester is to hold property by judicial authority. the property we're talking about here is the taxpayers' money. since congress has no judicial judicial -- since congress is not a judicial branch of the government with nor do they have judicial power, i don't understand how could they even implement the sequester? >> host: here's a tweet that says the sequester was obama's idea, but it bac
. the pentagon budget is expected to be cut to $47 billion over the past month. it is argued that these budget cuts would hurt military readiness. secretary ashton carter, and representatives of each branch of the military have testified. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets this morning to consider the impact of sequestration and a full year of continuing resolution on the department of defense. we welcome the deputy secretary of defense, ashton carter, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey, who is accompanied by with the following friends. robert hale, chief of staff of the army, general ray odierno, vice chief of operations, mark ferguson, and general james amos, chief of staff of the air force general mark welch and chief of the national guard bureau, general frank grabs. i would like to stop by thanking all of you. please convey our thanks to the soldiers, airmen and marines at home and in harms way around the globe. they and their families deserve our utmost support. some members of congress an
at the pentagon and intelligence advisory board, chuck hagel is uniquely qualified to meet challenges of defense and effort he put into the record many statements in support of senator hagel. this is what he says relative to a rant. iran poses a significant threat. >> please take your conversations outside the chamber. senate will proceed. >> no one talks about position on iran. poses a significant threat to the united states and interest in the region and globally. iran pursues an illicit nuclear program with the threats to provoke a regional arms race. and is fully committed to the quote preventing iran from obtaining new layer but then to achieve that goal and relative to israel, he's a strong supporter of israel, deputy minister he is a good friend of israel and in the word of dna alone says he believes and is not talking a senator hagel in the natural partnership between israel and the united states as part of the volume of defense relations between israel and the united states, which are so important to both countries. now the only question is what we're voting on. what we are voting on he
discuss their experiences and challenges and comment on the pentagon's recently lifting of its ban on women in combat. they're joined by women who are served in the canadian and norwegian military. this event held here in washington d.c. it's about an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning. >> talking about new standards. so, anyway -- >> so all i can say is, wow. wow. i mean, it's really an honor to be here and to hear the testimonies of those amazing women who not only are deck candidated -- decorated combat veterans but are ridiculously articulate and to hear what their experiences were and what they had to share this morning. i'm truly honored to be here with this panel. all of these women are truly accomplished and have lifted the groundwork on lift -- they've been part of women forging areas into new paths of previously hi reticket -- previously-restricted service, and they have expertise on gender integration in the military. so their full bios are available in your program, but i'll give them each a brief introducti
the enemy didn't have. but the second two points i think at that first of all the pentagon didn't show you any video of things it missed. that's bad pr. and the percentage of weapons that were smart weapons in the first gulf war while infinitely anything more than the iraqis had was remarkably small. compared to the impression the pentagon gave in the military briefings where they only showed pictures of smart bombs and smart missiles seen flying through windows. that was a very, very tiny percentage of the munitions actually expend. so i don't think this is so much a revolution of military affairs so much as a vivid demonstration as you pointed out as just a proficient at united states was in waging war, especially against a less proficient adversary. but it also was a military affairs, and that is the ultimate goal of the conflict was a political goal. and so, therefore, the military planning that involve both smart and dumb weapons in a war where design with a traditional military conclusion, which in truth was not revolution at all which was getting the enemy to do what you wanted. so
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12